WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 07 of 10] Add new shutdown mode for checkpoint

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 07 of 10] Add new shutdown mode for checkpoint
From: Brendan Cully <brendan@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:58:35 -0800
Cc: Xen Developers <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Fri, 12 Jan 2007 15:58:12 -0800
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <C1B9A6A6.6598%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Mail-followup-to: Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <d39e577379a3375d7340.1166168323@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <C1B9A6A6.6598%Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-11-21)
On Thursday, 28 December 2006 at 16:51, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 15/12/06 6:38 am, "Brendan Cully" <brendan@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > Add new shutdown mode for checkpoint.
> > 
> > When control/shutdown = checkpoint, invoke an alternate suspend path
> > that doesn't disconnect from back ends, and only reconnects when the
> > image has been restored into a new domain.
> 
> I don't think a new type of 'checkpoint' handler is required in the guest
> OS. We are already most of the way there in terms of doing as little as
> possible on the suspend side of save/restore, so we should fix up what
> little else there is to be done. Looking at the differences versus your new
> checkpointing suspend:
>  1. Xenbus_suspend() needs to stay. Actually most drivers do not have a
> suspend handler anyway (only tpmfront does). We should provide a
> suspend_cancelled() hook callback so that drivers which *do* have a suspend
> handler can distinguish between proper resume and checkpoint return.

I guess this is what you had in mind? I don't have anything that uses
it at the moment though. It's just suspend_dev cut'n'pasted.

Attachment: unsuspend.diff
Description: Text document

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>